[gentoo-user] [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[gentoo-user] [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[walt]

I'm surprised that this problem hasn't already been posted here.

For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.

The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5
installed on your machine.  A gentoo bug report was filed by our own
Nikos Chantziaras -- who did not post a headsup to this list :p

The fix is to downgrade bison to the 'stable' version 2.4.3, as stated
in Nikos's bug report.

Happy week-end to all :)

Re: [gentoo-user] [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[Indi]

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote:
> I'm surprised that this problem hasn't already been posted here.
> 
> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
> dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.
> 
> The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5
> installed on your machine.  A gentoo bug report was filed by our own
> Nikos Chantziaras -- who did not post a headsup to this list :p
> 
> The fix is to downgrade bison to the 'stable' version 2.4.3, as stated
> in Nikos's bug report.
> 
> Happy week-end to all :)

Thanks for that. I upgraded my ~x86 laptop today and a bunch of things
did break but revdep-rebuild appears to have handled it.

I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine. 

-- 
caveat utilitor 
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ 

Re: [gentoo-user] [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 782 bytes --]

On Fri, 20 May 2011 15:34:59 -0700, walt wrote:

> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
> dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.

Although LO appears to continue working fine without the rebuild, at
least for my basic usage.

> The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5
> installed on your machine.  A gentoo bug report was filed by our own
> Nikos Chantziaras -- who did not post a headsup to this list :p
> 
> The fix is to downgrade bison to the 'stable' version 2.4.3, as stated
> in Nikos's bug report.

There's a patch to fix this without downgrading at


-- 
Neil Bothwick

QOTD:
	The only easy way to tell a hamster from a gerbil is that the
	gerbil has more dark meat.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[walt]

On 05/20/2011 08:24 PM, Indi wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote:

>> For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke
>> dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice.
>>
>> The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5

> I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine. 

Yes, that would be expected because bison is needed only at compile time,
not at run time.

I would be using libreoffice-bin too, except for a ridiculous change made
about a year ago in the way openoffice charts are scaled on the y-axis.

I complained bitterly on the openoffice 'chart' mail list, only to discover
that openoffice changed its perfectly good scaling algorithm to ape a change
made in M$ Office!

Nobody at openoffice.org would consider reverting that ridiculous mee-too
change, so I've been editing the open(libre)office source code to remove it
myself before compiling it.  I was very disappointed to find a major open-
source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :(

[gentoo-user] Re: [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 05/22/2011 01:03 AM, walt wrote:
> I was very disappointed to find a major open-
> source project following M$ around like a hungry puppy :(

It needs to.  If it's not compatible with M$, people won't use it as much.